2014 FIFA World Cup

[Essex_George]

he had his worst game for a while, and made a mistake like all players do. Unfortunately, it was a very costly mistake.

The real problem tho is the defence. Gerrard's mistake shouldn't have cost us a goal.

[Essex_George]

What did he say?

[eFestivals]

Which Gerrard mistake are you talking about the mis-timed tackle that lead to the first goal or the headed that lead to the second?

his wasn't the only mistimed tackle for the first goal, nor the only mistimed tackle of the match.

I'm on about the 2nd. It was a perfect knock on for a striker. If he'd done that for Suarez at Anfield he'd be well-chuffed.

Too many "in the hole" creative forwards shoe horned into a system that didn't work for me

yup. I've no idea why Barkley was brought on with Rooney still on the field - that was never going to give us more options.

[pink_triangle]

The most key role in the first goal was Sterling's, and a tap-in isn't showing high class.

.

[eFestivals]

I think this argument that the key role in that goal is silly and purely about pushing the credit from the scapegoat of the month to the flavour of the month. It was a great cross by Rooney and you see players messing up those crosses regularly. That goal was about 3 players all playing a key role.

I'm not doubting that it was a perfect cross - but Rooney had the opportunity to make similar crosses and didn't, and other players would have made that cross too.

It was all about the ball that came to him, that gave him the space and opportunity to make that cross. In both of the matches played, there were very very few cutting passes made of the quality of that ball from Sterling.

As for the tap in, they count as much as Cahill wonder goals. If English strikers (Rooney included) had scored more tap ins, England would have achieved more.

Absolutely.

But people tend to forget that it isn't Rooney or nothing, it's Rooney or another player... and whoever that player might have been, they'd have contributed something too.

Of course, there's no guarantee the replacement wo0uld have been top-class, but Rooney wasn't top-class.

Suarez was carrying about half a stone extra last night. He showed Rooney what a proper world class striker can do, even when they're fat and short of games like Rooney.

Edited June 20, 2014 by eFestivals

[hot_ice]

think hodgson got it wrong in the second half,

we were crying out for more width with the subs, just a shame that the OX was injured as i think he would of been perfected to take the left back and right back on, (he brings a bit of extra muscle which sterling lacks)

also can someone explain to me why wellbeck started ahead of lallana,

[dentalplan]

also can someone explain to me why wellbeck started ahead of lallana,

[Essex_George]

also can someone explain to me why wellbeck started ahead of lallana,

[eFestivals]

(he brings a bit of extra muscle which sterling lacks)

Really?

I'm not sure that the bloke he knocked out last night would agree with you.

For a little guy Sterling has tremendous strength. If he was a bigger size with the same strength no one would be saying he was too weak.

[eFestivals]

think hodgson got it wrong in the second half,

we were crying out for more width with the subs, just a shame that the OX was injured as i think he would of been perfected to take the left back and right back on

To be fair, Woy had the team playing with width anyway in the 2nd half - but via wing-backs and not wingers.

Baines got a lot more joy in the 2nd half, and our 2nd half goal came via Johnson getting down the sides (preceded by the type of great work from Sturridge that i never expect of him).

[hot_ice]

maybe i am in minority, i really dont rate wellbeck and i think Lallana would of been more creative,

on sterling, from my viewpoint he does seemed to get knocked off the ball more than ox, but i do concede the argument is irrelevant as the OX was injured.

i think we see from the best teams that they use there both the full backs and wingers to double up on the opposition and we didnt do that enough,

[eFestivals]

maybe i am in minority, i really dont rate wellbeck and i think Lallana would of been more creative,

on sterling, from my viewpoint he does seemed to get knocked off the ball more than ox, but i do concede the argument is irrelevant as the OX was injured.

i think we see from the best teams that they use there both the full backs and wingers to double up on the opposition and we didnt do that enough,

I'm with you on Welbeck and Lallana, but I think it would have been harsh to have dropped Welbeck after his Italy performance - I think he justified his place for last night with that. But he was pretty anonymous last night, and i'd have much rather seen Lallana and Lambert instead of Welbeck and Rooney.

Talking of knocking off the ball .... Suarez did Gerrard a good un last night that made me laugh.

And I agree with your last bit. Ultimately I think we had too many players on the field who all wanted to be the one to score a goal (plus Barkley later on, who can only play down the middle - so in the same space as everyone else. Taking off Sterling for him seems very odd).

Edited June 20, 2014 by eFestivals

[Essex_George]

maybe i am in minority, i really dont rate wellbeck and i think Lallana would of been more creative,

[ThomThomDrum]

He retired, no need to put it in inverted commas, and if by 'relationship with the FA' you mean that they had the audacity to charge him with being a racist and him not having the balls to face up to anyone as a convicted racist outside of his safe Chelsea bubble where they all worship him as a God no matter how much he abuses someone then yes that's why he retired.

And yes the FA fined him 220k and banned him for four games.

[pink_triangle]

This inquest eg slagging off players, journalists asking hodgson about his future is silly. England are still in the world cup, so wait until they are out before throwing the toys out of the pram.

The 3 results England need are all possible it's not like they need Iran to beat Argentina. If Italy beat Costa Rica which they have every incentive to do, I give England a 25% chance of progression.

[LondonTom]

Yeah that's the obvious choice, pretty much the only guaranteed starter in the squad.

[LondonTom]

The 3 results England need are all possible it's not like they need Iran to beat Argentina. If Italy beat Costa Rica which they have every incentive to do, I give England a 25% chance of progression.

[hot_ice]

Spot on, its unlikely but its hardly the strangest results in Football we need.

The main problem I see is England being able to win by 2 or 3 against Costa Rica, unless Italy destroy their GD tonight.

[ThomThomDrum]

i also think italy v uruguay has gotta draw written all over it so it let both sides progress

[eFestivals]

am loving Ballotelli's kiss tweet.

I'm particularly liking that he had to make clear he wasn't wanting to use tongues.

[dentalplan]

Spot on, its unlikely but its hardly the strangest results in Football we need.

The main problem I see is England being able to win by 2 or 3 against Costa Rica, unless Italy destroy their GD tonight.

[pink_triangle]

The problem is even if italy do that, then they will surely rest some of there players for the game against uruguay because with all due respect, im not sure if matters if they come top or second in the group as the last 16 both teams are pretty much the same in quality Colombia/ ivory coast,

i also think italy v uruguay has gotta draw written all over it so it let both sides progress

[dentalplan]

I probably shouldn't be surprised by this but I kind of am:

Annual salaries for every World Cup coach (from here):

1. Fabio Capello, Russia — $11,235,210

2. Roy Hodgson, England — $5,874,570

3. Cesare Prandelli, Italy — $4,322,010

4. Luiz Felipe Scolari, Brazil — $3,973,730

5. Ottmar Hitzfeld, Switzerland — $3,745,130

6. Joachim Löw, Germany — $3,602,460

7. Vicente del Bosque, Spain — $3,386,270

8. Louis van Gaal, Netherlands — $2,738,060

9. Alberto Zaccheroni, Japan — $2,727,480

10. Jurgen Klinsmann, United States — $2,621,740

11. Didier Deschamps, France — $2,161,000

12. Paulo Bento, Portugal — $2,160,170

13. Carlos Queiroz, Iran — $2,098,060

14. Jorge Sampaoli, Chile — $1,774,960

15. Jose Pekerman, Colombia — $1,678,450

16. Ange Postecoglou, Australia — $1,395,300

17. Óscar Tabárez, Uruguay — $1,258,840

18. Sabri Lamouchi, Ivory Coast — $1,037,450

19. Vahid Halilhodžić, Algeria — $1,007,070

20. Marc Wilmots, Belgium — $864,400

21. Fernando Santos, Greece — $864,400

22. Alejandro Sabella, Argentina — $818,240

23. Hong Myung-bo, South Korea — $795,250

24. Luis Fernando Suárez, Honduras — $629,420

25. Reinaldo Rueda, Ecuador — $566,480

26. Jorge Luis Pinto, Costa Rica — $440,590

27. Volke Finke, Cameroon — $394,440

28. Stephen Keshi, Nigeria — $392,420

29. Safet Susic, Bosnia and Herzegovina — $352,470

30. Niko Kovac, Croatia — $271,740

31. James Kwesi Appiah, Ghana — $251,770

32. Miguel Herrera, Mexico — $209,810

[hot_ice]

Second in our group probably get Brazil in the QF's I think so may be worth finishing top to get Netherlands instead. So there is some incentive for Italy.

Edited June 20, 2014 by hot_ice

[eFestivals]

I probably shouldn't be surprised by this but I kind of am:

I think it's more the consequence of the stupid amounts that the FA shelled out for Sven and Postman Pat.

After all, it would be a bit insulting to Woy to say he's not worth as much as them, despite him having just been appointed to the same job.

Still, the FA have learnt that England's real problems are naff all to do with who the manager is, so we don't need to go the 'top' manager route again. Over time the England manager's wage should rise less slowly than others, and eventually be around what others are paying.